First, let me start by saying that I really do love my ob/gyn. She's helped us so much in this journey and I feel that she stands out amongst her peers in being supportive about our wishes for a natural birth. It was she who suggested I look into Hypnobirthing (which I have and am totally going to get on board with).
That being said, there are 4 doctors in her practice. Which means that there is only a 25% chance that she will be the one to deliver my baby. I also know that one of the other doctors has said out loud "I just don't get women who don't want the epidural." And the other two, I'm just not sure I've been around enough to know how they truly feel.
Coupled with the stat sheet I received a few days ago with astronomically high rates of medical interventions performed on normal childbirth in their affiliated hospital, I'm just in a bind.
Some of you may question the logic in someone like me, who needed medical help to conceive being so adament on childbirth as a natural, normal, to be minimally interferred with process. Does it make sense? I'm sure there is a perfectly valid way to explain it...but I can't put to words what's in my heart.
I could not have conceived without help...therefore I had no option but medical intervention to help me conceive. However, most childbirths can happen without this kind of intervention and almost all need fair less routine medical help than they are actually provided with. That's pretty much the foundation of how I can rectify this oxymoron of a philosophy.
A 32% c-section rate!? A 94% IV rate? A 70% epidural rate? My son (born in 2005) was one of only 6% of natural births at this hospital? I just can't get my mind around how it can possibly be the case that 1/3 of all women are so malformed that they need a c-section or that 94% of women are so dehydrated that they must have an IV. When does the "preventative" line cross the "invasive" line?
Before panic sets in...I do know that there are other options for me. I wanted a homebirth and know full well that in low-risk pregnancies (which mine has been and should continue to be) it is just as safe for mother and baby, if not a little safer due to the decreased risk of contracting an infection. That being said, insurance won't foot the bill and Joanne isn't really 100% comfortable with the idea (which I've mentioned before in my posts).
A birth center was the compromise we came up with and I think now, in earnest, I need to face reality that I'm likely not going to have the best birth for my baby at my local hospital where he can be brought into the world on his own accord and direction.
I've made the appointment to tour one of the two in my state. (This one is in the next town over from where my parents live so it is convenient). I'll be sad at having to tell my doctor I'm switching...but I really think this is going to be the best option for me and my baby.